This report shows public data only. Is this your organisation? If so, login here to view your full report.

GAM Holding AG

PRI reporting framework 2017

Export Public Responses
Pdf-img

You are in Direct - Fixed Income » ESG incorporation in actively managed fixed income » (C) Implementation: Integration

(C) Implementation: Integration

FI 14. Integration overview

14.1. Describe your approach to integrating ESG into traditional financial analysis.

At this stage in our journey as a PRI signatory, we have not decided to embed ESG factors into traditional financial analysis as standard across all our investment teams. Some of our teams do embed E,S and G factors into their financial models - however, this is not yet standard across GAM. While we have a common distribution platform, we actively foster a broad range of independent investment teams who are accorded an extraordinary degree of latitude in their investment philosophies and processes. We do not, for example, hold a 'house' view - each team has the freedom to invest as they wish. It follows that we do not deploy a standardised financial analysis template nor do we have large research teams that act as a common pool of investment ideas. Therefore, at this stage we are treating ESG factors as risk factors that we use for screening. The worst ESG rated companies are highlighted and managers treat the results as warning flags that may materially impact the investment performance of their portfolios.

14.2. Describe how your ESG integration approach is adapted to each of the different types of fixed income you invest in.

Corporate (financial)

At this stage of our progress as a PRI signatory, we find our current approach works best for us across both fixed income and equities because we are targeting the companies / entities rather than narrowly separating by source of capital (equities / debt). We do not make a distinction on how we treat ESG factors for financial and non-financial corporates. While their business models may differ, all companies need to carry out good governance and have relevant regard for environmental and social factors where they have or potentially may cause an impact.

Corporate (non-financial)

At this stage of our progress as a PRI signatory, we find our current approach works best for us across both fixed income and equities because we are targeting the companies / entities rather than narrowly separating by source of capital (equities / debt). We do not make a distinction on how we treat ESG factors for financial and non-financial corporates. While their business models may differ, all companies need to carry out good governance and have relevant regard for environmental and social factors where they have or potentially may cause an impact.

14.3. Additional information [OPTIONAL]


FI 15. Integration - ESG information in investment processes

15.1. Indicate how ESG information is typically used as part of your investment process.

Select all that apply
Corporate (financial)
Corporate (non-financial)
ESG analysis is integrated into fundamental analysis
ESG analysis is integrated into security weighting decisions
ESG analysis is integrated into portfolio construction decisions
ESG analysis is a standard part of internal credit ratings or assessment
ESG analysis for issuers is a standard agenda item at investment committee meetings
ESG analysis is regularly featured in internal research notes or similar
ESG analysis is a standard feature of ongoing portfolio monitoring
ESG analysis featuresĀ in all internal issuer summaries or similar documents
Other, specify

15.2. Additional information [OPTIONAL]


FI 16. Integration - E,S and G issues reviewed

16.1. Indicate the extent to which ESG issues are reviewed in your integration process.

Environment
Social
Governance
Corporate (financial)

Environmental

Social

Governance

Corporate (non-financial)

Environmental

Social

Governance

16.2. Please provide more detail on how you review E, S and G factors in your integration process.

Corporate (financial)

As stated in FI 14.2, we do not make a distinction on how we treat ESG factors for financial and non-financial corporates. While their business models may differ, the ability to discern the advantages and disadvantages per issuer and issue falls under the traditional investment analysis in which our managers already possess particular expertise. However, all companies need to carry out good governance and have relevant regard for environmental and social factors where they have or potentially may cause an impact. As previously stated, at this stage of our journey as a PRI signatory, we treat ESG factors as risk factors that we use for screening. The worst ESG rated companies are highlighted and managers treat the results as warning flags that may materially impact the investment performance of their portfolios.

Corporate (non-financial)

As stated in FI 14.2, we do not make a distinction on how we treat ESG factors for financial and non-financial corporates. While their business models may differ, the ability to discern the advantages and disadvantages per issuer and issue falls under the traditional investment analysis in which our managers already possess particular expertise. However, all companies need to carry out good governance and have relevant regard for environmental and social factors where they have or potentially may cause an impact. As previously stated, at this stage of our journey as a PRI signatory, we treat ESG factors as risk factors that we use for screening. The worst ESG rated companies are highlighted and managers treat the results as warning flags that may materially impact the investment performance of their portfolios.

16.3. Additional information.[OPTIONAL]


Top